Image
Comments
| Anonymous #1173297 3 months ago |
Instead of making shitty text posts, why dont we post ponies? |
| misnamed #1173300 3 months ago |
That's the same damn thing, except it would be mandatory
So what exactly would be better about it? |
| Anonymous #1173308 3 months ago |
@297
instead of making a stupid comment, why dont we stay on topic? |
| Verbose #1173310 3 months ago |
^ Dis. |
| Verbose #1173313 3 months ago |
Gah, I knew I should have @misnamed... |
| Anonymous #1173315 3 months ago |
@misnamed
because the anons would rejoice using the words candy-ass and such |
| misnamed #1173328 3 months ago |
#1173315, I'm pretty sure the anons can already rejoice in using whatever words they want
I honestly have no idea what you are trying to tell me |
| Anonymous #1173342 3 months ago |
@misnamed
re-read the pic. |
| misnamed #1173349 3 months ago |
no |
| arcanescroll #1173368 3 months ago |
Can't you already filter out stuff you don't like? |
| Arrkhal #1173375 3 months ago |
Instead of being illiterate and spelling "don't" wrong, why don't we go back to grade school? |
| FeralSocks018 #1173389 3 months ago |
@arcanescroll
Yes. Yes we can. |
| Anonymous #1173391 3 months ago |
@arrkhal
Oh excuse Mr Nazi Faggot. |
| Mike_Hawke #1173392 3 months ago |
People on the Internet are way too easily butthurt. |
| PhilSrobeighn #1173409 3 months ago |
How about instead we just deal with the fact taht everyone has different tastes and opinions and will eventually post something we don't like? |
| Hakuzo #1173428 3 months ago |
1 Because word filters don't work on images.
2 Because it would be mandatory for everybody. 3 Because word filters are "fancy scripts" too. |
| picard #1173762 3 months ago |
^ I think he's talking about that tool that can block entire comments that contain certain words, for example "nigger". People use that tool because the use a word like "nigger" and low quality posts are highly correlated from a statistical point of view for whatever reasons.
And to answer OP's question: Because wordfilters work completely different. You can of course replace the word "nigger" with another word like "antidisestablishmentarianist", but in 99 out of 100 cases, that will not improve the quality of the post. If you would write a script that recognizes low quality posts and replaces them with context-related quotes of famous English writers, things would look different, though. |
| MenHnnngingWithChestPain #1173768 3 months ago |
You guys seem to forget that Ponibooru actually supports a comment word ban. It's just unused:
http://www.ponibooru.org/ext_doc/ban_words I don't know how 4chan works, but remember that this kind of blacklists works the same way for every user. An userscript allows every user to set up a filter to match his/her own sensitivity. arcanescroll@1173368 said: Only images, not comments. Hakuzo@1173428 said: Content Preferences are for that. Obviously, trollanons never tag the images they upload, and there will never be something 100% effective. |
| ILSS #1173812 3 months ago |
We shouldn't use a word filter because that would bring Ponibooru one step closer to being like the reeking hole that is Ponychan. |
| Ichijoe #1175731 3 months ago |
I would like to elect the following:
F*ck should be Feather (As in GO FEATHER YOURSELF) Sh*t should be Horesapples.... |
| Eco #1175757 3 months ago |
do people want content preferences to support comment filtration as well?
I mean, that's not a crazy feature. it's something we could do. it'd even solve the animated gif issue. the only problem I see is that comment filtration does weird things to conversations; people end up seeing comments that are responding to what looks like nothing. which may or may not be a problem. (as far as global word filters or word bans... someone is going to have to decide what words constitute evildoing, and decide it for everyone - which is against the aesthetic of "each person decides for themselves" I've put forward in running this site up to now.) |
| Anonymous #1176088 3 months ago |
^ECO, YOU ARE ALIVE!!!! |